DC Circuit denies Democrat appeal to block Trump election overhaul

The appeals panel agreed with a federal judge that it could not block the executive order until its proposals have been enacted.WASHINGTON (CN) — A D.C. Circuit panel on Tuesday rejected an effort by top Democrats to block President Donald Trump’s executive order seeking to reshape the nation’s election system by creating a national list of eligible voters and limiting mail-in voting.The three-judge panel upheld U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols’ May 28 decision denying a preliminary injunction after determining the Democratic National Committee and congressional leaders failed to show any imminent or irreparable harm, as neither the Department of Homeland Security or the U.S. Postal Service had yet acted.U.S. Circuit Judges Patricia Millett, Robert Wilkins and Gregory Katsas — two Barack Obama appointees and a Trump appointee, respectively — wrote in a per curiam order that while there may be a “number of serious questions concerning the lawfulness of proposed actions if implemented,” the court cannot rule until those actions occur.“In addition, the executive order, which is itself not self-executing, directs the agencies to act only to ‘the extent feasible and consistent with applicable law, including but not limited to the Privacy Act of 1974,’ and so requires compliance with the very legal limitations about which plaintiffs are concerned,” the panel wrote. “If the defendant agencies take steps to implement the executive order in a manner that violates federal law or the Constitution, plaintiffs can promptly seek relief, which the district court and this court can decide in as expeditious a manner as circumstances require.”On March 31, Trump signed “Ensuring Citizenship Verification and Integrity in Federal Elections,” which would create lists of U.S. citizens eligible to vote in each state and instructs the U.S. Postal Service to send mail ballots only to verified voters.Under the order, the Department of Homeland Security and the Social Security Administration must compile and transmit to each state a list of voters “confirmed to be U.S. citizens." The order also instructs the U.S. Postal Service to create a rule requiring voters to opt into a state’s mail-in voting list.Trump’s executive order came as the Senate was debating whether to pass the Safeguard American Eligibility Act, which would have enacted many of the same provisions had it passed. The legislation stalled in the Senate in April, leaving many of its extra provisions with the bill.The SAVE Act would have also required new voters to appear in person at an election office with a valid U.S. passport, a certified birth certificate with a photo ID, a naturalization certificate or a Consular Report of Birth Abroad. Only five states currently issue enhanced driver’s licenses that meet the requirements.Trump has maintained a consistent pressure campaign on the Senate to pass the SAVE Act, most recently pressing Majority Leader John Thune to cancel the body’s upcoming August recess and terminate the filibuster to pass the bill.Thune and other top Republican Senators have resisted Trump’s effort to eliminate the filibuster, adding that the president should redirect his ire to Democrats and work on flipping the seven Democrats needed to reach 60 votes.The Democrats filed their suit April 1, arguing the new documentation requirements would disenfranchise lawful voters who may not have the necessary documents or the ability to present them at an election office.The D.C. Circuit panel cited the Supreme Court’s 2020 decision in *Trump v. New York,*which centered on a presidential memorandum announcing a policy to exclude noncitizens from the apportionment base for the national census.There, the high court ruled 6-3 to vacate a district court’s injunction halting enforcement of the memorandum after finding it unripe due to then-pending nature of the proposals.“Plaintiffs’ current motion is in a similar position,” the panel wrote. “First, plaintiffs claim court types of injuries that — like the injuries in *Trump v. New York —*flow not from executive order 14,399 itself, but entirely from predicted future actions contemplated by that order.”Further, the panel wrote that it is limited in its review due to the sparse record at the preliminary stage of litigation.While the Democrats argued the executive order would violate the Privacy Act by requiring the Department of Homeland Security to employ federal databases not contemplated by the statute, they do not specify which databases those would include, and whether the department would use them at all. There is no such detail as to what measures the U.S. Postal Service would take regarding mail ballots, the panel added.Tuesday’s decision follows a recent D.C. Circuit decision that any lawsuit challenging postal changes by the U.S. Postal Service must first be brought before the Postal Regulatory Commission before it can be heard in federal court.On July 14, a separate three-judge panel unanimously rejected such a lawsuit by New York, Hawaii, New Jersey, New York City and San Francisco, finding the court had no jurisdiction to hear the case for the first time.Subscribe to our free newslettersOur weekly newsletter Closing Arguments offers the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world, while the monthly Under the Lights dishes the legal dirt from Hollywood, sports, Big Tech and the arts.Additional Reads